That pulling power they have remains unrivalled. Season or two outside of the CL? Not a problem

They kinda dont have pulling power really what they have is a lot of money, but Manu are FAR down the list of a club that a player would go to if it wasnt for that, they just have deep pockets in my opinion.

Poor guy, I really do feel for him...feel he's been really used and taken advantage of by the system in some ways. If his compulsion were only to give eliminator tackles like Charlie Adam or Mathieu Flamini or any other countless number of players instead of translating a kinky and harmless sex act to the football pitch, he'd be far less penalised and far better accepted, that's the sad part.

Oh yeah such a poor bloke. He behaves like a child by biting someone out of frustration and we're meant to feel sorry for him because he has to explain to his children why he's banned? Maybe don't behave like one of your children might do and your children won't be asking why you've been punished.

He then lies to his wife about something he did in front of the whole world on television, as if she won't know haha. So he treats his wife like an idiot and tells a lie only an absolute moron could think they'd get away with. Wow, the reasons to pity him really are stacking up quickly.

But he was only caught doing the exact same thing twice prior to biting Chiellini in 2014, Bakkal in 2010 and Ivanovic in 2013, surely saying "sorry" and "I can't believe it, bla bla I have feelings, poor wife" after the third time gives him credibility?

On the other hand, if it is rather the case that he is a systematic bullshitter and liar with zero credibility, then his transfer to Barca makes sense as they fit each other perfectly

Man I don't know what to believe here. He is pretty good at football though, the biting aside.

Footballers do things that are as childish or more in every single match (and much more dangerous). There's nothing really that childish about biting, it's just extremely weird and indicative of a playing style that served him to go from Uruguay to Europe, and was praised of him until he did something that the general public found unsightly and disagreeable. And because people find it unsightly and disagreeable in basically an aesthetic sense he's gotten punishments that don't even begin to fit the crime. In short the same capitalist world economy that encouraged him to find a sort of niche mentality to achieve a very against the odds success then turns around and punishes him for a rather harmless and stupid offshoot of said mentality.

If football were as heavy handed with other more dangerous acts, like stupid tackles, or bribery, or using influence in shady ways, then fine, it would at least be more palatable his punishment. As it is there's not a whiff of equality in the whole thing.

Biting people out of frustration is a behaviour that in humans is predominantly associated with children, not adults. Therefore the word childish is entirely appropriate in this context.

Not really interested in the rest of your post because you just come across as an apologist for his bad behaviour. I was just addressing the tone of what he said, which was whingy and all about how hard done by he is. I think he's pathetic to invoke his wife and kids as if we should feel sorry for him when the whole situation is a result of his own stupidity. If it was a one off I'd be more inclined to feel some sympathy, but it was the third time. He'd had plenty of warnings. Plenty of opportunities to stop behaving in a way that is societally unacceptable as well as unacceptable in football.

Now I agree that horror tackles should be punished similarly, as that is far worse behaviour and far more dangerous/harmful. But I don't think that's relevant here, that's not Suarez' argument and he's not using that valid point to try and illicit sympathy. He's talking about making an insanely moronic lie to his wife and having to justify his shitty behaviour to his kids, which I don't have an ounce of sympathy over lol

Well he would seem to be the only player in the world who fell foul of this with his own interpatation of sub human standards.Lets also realise even falling below the standards of human decency he was rewarded with a transfer to one of the richest clubs in the world.You do make a good point about inequality on punishment as that multi talented front 3 at Barca are amongst the shadiest players in the games recent history.

In short the same capitalist world economy that encouraged him to find a sort of niche mentality to achieve a very against the odds success then turns around and punishes him for a rather harmless and stupid offshoot of said mentality.

. I was just addressing the tone of what he said, which was whingy and all about how hard done by he is. I think he's pathetic to invoke his wife and kids as if we should feel sorry for him when the whole situation is a result of his own stupidity. If it was a one off I'd be more inclined to feel some sympathy, but it was the third time. He'd had plenty of warnings. Plenty of opportunities to stop behaving in a way that is societally unacceptable as well as unacceptable in football.

Is it really whingy to complain about unfair treatment? He's clearly been singled out and treated more harshly for an extremely light offence than practically any other player, and made to look like some kind of subnormal freak...when you suffer that in front of your kids and wife, I can completely understand the denial in the moment, or the mortification in front of his kids. Rather than whingy the comments strike me as logical. Re: the warnings it's clearly an impulsive behaviour, the way to treat such a thing is through treatment, warnings aren't going to do much on that front. And the societally acceptable bit is exactly the point, it's kinda funny that a little bit causes mass societal outrage, yet tackles that can literally deprive someone of their livelihood or worse are often met even with applause, and there's been very little general action on this front by football's governing bodies.

JakeyBoy:

Now I agree that horror tackles should be punished similarly, as that is far worse behaviour and far more dangerous/harmful. But I don't think that's relevant here, that's not Suarez' argument and he's not using that valid point to try and illicit sympathy.

Isn't it? It's needed perspective, that this boy has been made a pariah and made into a kind of grotesque villain for not being able to refrain from an ultimately harmless impulse, whereas the same people who have made him a pariah and punished him so heavy handedly haven't done so with far, far more serious cases. I would say it's totally relevant, I can't imagine what would be more relevant to the discussion tbh.

In short, let's face it, the treatment of Suárez was an entirely self-serving action so to avoid 'looking bad' from a rather terrible organisation.